|
|
Mark-T wrote:
> Something has always bothered me about the diagonalization
> bit, a consideration I have never seen addressed.
You should get out more.
> You hypothesize the countable list of all reals, encoded
> in binary, then diagonalize out of it, by complementing the
> diagonal. Sounds good.
>
> Except... isn't there a slight problem here, in the sense of
> 'computable', or 'effective procedure'? How does one diagonalize
> an infinite set? Of course, it's easy to describe, "here's what
> you do", but in fact you cannot DO it! You cannot create this
> new 'unlisted' number, not in finite time, anyhow...
I say we need a troll-check for every re-introduction of this.
|
|